In terms of actual skill, who is more talented between Federer and young Nalbandian?

I know Nalbandian used to give Federer a lot of fits in the earlier days, even in defeat, and Nalbandian never dedicated his life to his craft.
In terms of pure talent and ball striking skills, who is better between them?

Both are more or less evenly talented in terms of tennis, but Federer is the better athlete.

Let's not even get into things like mental toughness, dedication and serve. :lol:

Click to expand...

Yup, it's almost ridiculous how sure you are of this. Fed's forehand is top 20 in the world at best. His backhand? Worse than any other one-hander I've seen. Where is that 100 sq inch racquet again...?

Yup, it's almost ridiculous how sure you are of this. Fed's forehand is top 20 in the world at best. His backhand? Worse than any other one-hander I've seen. Where is that 100 sq inch racquet again...?

Yup, it's almost ridiculous how sure you are of this. Fed's forehand is top 20 in the world at best. His backhand? Worse than any other one-hander I've seen. Where is that 100 sq inch racquet again...?

Anyone who has seen Nalbandian's match with Federer in the 2003 Australian Open and in their indoor matches would agree that David has the better pure ballstriking skills. Despite being 5'11 (at best) he just has the ability to outhit just about anyone on tour once shotmaking becomes more important than movement as is in an indoor tournament.

Federer has been so successful due to his superior mental toughness, match fitness and movement.

what did Nalbandian do in his whole career ?
No tennis player can be compared to Federer in terms of skill or talent

Click to expand...

Every time somebody makes a decent and interesting thread, these people have to stink the place up.

1. No Nalbandian's talent isn't "immensely overrated" on these forums. You just happen to be a glory hunter who isn't smart enough to distinguish true ability without having a dozen of trophies next to it.

2. People hype up Nalbandian so much because he is in all likelihood one of the most gifted player in history.

3. Another johnny come lately that cannot comprehend the meaning of the question of "WHO IS MORE TALENTED". Are you aware, how OFTEN Naldandian has made your idol look like a jock?

Every time somebody makes a decent and interesting thread, these people have to stink the place up.

1. No Nalbandian's talent isn't "immensely overrated" on these forums. You just happen to be a glory hunter who isn't smart enough to distinguish true ability without having a dozen of trophies next to it.

2. People hype up Nalbandian so much because he is in all likelihood one of the most gifted player in history.

3. Another johnny come lately that cannot comprehend the meaning of the question of "WHO IS MORE TALENTED". Are you aware, how OFTEN Naldandian has made your idol look like a jock?

Click to expand...

True. True. True. Safin and Nalbandian had the talent to win 20 Grand Slams between them; just not the temperament.

Nalbandian is not over-hyped at all. He is a super talented tennis player. The problem with Nalby is that he was never as dedicated as Fed. His biggest problem is his fitness level. Nalbandian simply loves his burgers and his women more than tennis.

Fed easily. Nalbandian was a very fine ballstriker but he didn't have the power and athleticism of federer.

his feel for the ball and technique are certainly up there with anyone but talent is not just about how great your droppers and angle shots are.

athleticism, mental strength, willpower and hitting power are equally as important and fed was easily better than nalby in any of those.
It's no coinicidence that nalby didn't win more in his career.

Click to expand...

Thank you for proving you have no idea what "talent" means.

Mental strength and will power are diametrically opposed to talent. It is the last thing that has to do with gift or else, a guy like Ferrer or Simon is immensely talented as well.

Atleticism isn't talent either or else, many guys from the NFL would be "talented" tennis players. Physical talent is something you could use for any sport. "Tennis talent" only works for tennis though and should be the only one used.

Every time somebody makes a decent and interesting thread, these people have to stink the place up.

1. No Nalbandian's talent isn't "immensely overrated" on these forums. You just happen to be a glory hunter who isn't smart enough to distinguish true ability without having a dozen of trophies next to it.

2. People hype up Nalbandian so much because he is in all likelihood one of the most gifted player in history.

3. Another johnny come lately that cannot comprehend the meaning of the question of "WHO IS MORE TALENTED". Are you aware, how OFTEN Naldandian has made your idol look like a jock?

Click to expand...

hey , what do you want ? We don't agree with you and we're entitled to our opinion . and your idol ( nalby ) didn't make Fed look like a joke , don't base your argument on one match or two and mind your language next time

I agree. It is funny there is anyone on this forum who thinks Federer is mentally as tough as Nadal imparticular, LOL!

I would say in their youth they were about equal talents, but Federer's talents developed and grew by leaps and bounds while Nalbandian's did not.

Click to expand...

Nadal's mental toughness is a little overrated. Grinders typically "choke" less anyway. They maintain the same level for a longer time. Also, he got crushed in straights far more often than Federer did.

I wouldn't say that Federer is as tough as Nadal, but I disagree that there is some massive gap.

On talent "developing": pretty sure the word "talent" is supposed to be the "gold" that a person has in their "soil". Not exactly something that you can "develop" only resurface.

D-Nal was brilliant. If I were a player, I'd still be afraid to face him in Davis Cup when he's healthy.

He's got deadly angles. Have some posters here not seen the matches where he's beaten Roger? And not because Roger wasn't playing well, either. Is there a clip of that Shanghai Masters match around here somewhere?

hey , what do you want ? We don't agree with you and we're entitled to our opinion . and your idol ( nalby ) didn't make Fed look like a joke , don't base your argument on one match or two and mind your language next time

Also, what in the 7 hells of tartarus is "we are entitles to our opinion" supposed to mean? :lol: Did I ever state that you are legally banned from stating uninformed nonsense. Your opinion is wrong. And I am entitles to THAT opinion.

Nadal's mental toughness is a little overrated. Grinders typically "choke" less anyway. They maintain the same level for a longer time. Also, he got crushed in straights far more often than Federer did.

I wouldn't say that Federer is as tough as Nadal, but I disagree that there is some massive gap.

On talent "developing": pretty sure the word "talent" is supposed to be the "gold" that a person has in their "soil". Not exactly something that you can "develop" only resurface.

Click to expand...

You think Nadal's everything is overrated so who cares. It is hilarious you think a player who basically relied entirely on speed, mental toughness, overall defense, a forehand, and basically nothing else and won 11 slams by his mid 20s could be matches or surpassed easily by many in mental toughness and speed as you seem to think.

Nadal gets crushed since his game is more crushable, especialy on a hard court which is the only surface he has ever been crushed on really. It has nothing to do with lack of mental toughness. In fact almost the only way to beat Nadal is by crushing him, hence why he almost never loses on clay, and only loses on hard courts when he runs into guys who power right him and win by big margins normally.

Every time somebody makes a decent and interesting thread, these people have to stink the place up.

1. No Nalbandian's talent isn't "immensely overrated" on these forums. You just happen to be a glory hunter who isn't smart enough to distinguish true ability without having a dozen of trophies next to it.

2. People hype up Nalbandian so much because he is in all likelihood one of the most gifted player in history.

3. Another johnny come lately that cannot comprehend the meaning of the question of "WHO IS MORE TALENTED". Are you aware, how OFTEN Naldandian has made your idol look like a jock?

Nalbandian has had far more matches where he cannot hit the ball into the court from either his fh or bh.

That says far more about his ballstriking ability compared to federer than some occasional shanking.

They both have been equally impressive in their best matches.

Federer more so on the fh...nalbandian on the bh. But fed has the variety with the slice.

Click to expand...

sigh

I SAID HITTING THE BALL WITH THE CENTER OF YOUR RACQUET

Missing the court doesn't mean you can't strike the ball. Hantuchova is one of the cleanest strikers of the ball and she routinely makes over 50 UEs.

Berdych for example is also a better striker of the ball than Federer. He also makes lots of errors. Agassi. Safin. Baghdatis. Davydenko. THOSE guy strike the ball cleanly. Not Federer. Him and Nadal don't hit the ball that cleanly at all.

I am no Nalbandian fan and I find him comically overrated on this forum at times but I do agree with dangalak he is undoubtably one of the cleanest and overall best ball strikers of the last decade. As for compared to Federer, he is atleast as good of one I would say (even though overall he isnt half the player Federer turned out to be).

Missing the court doesn't mean you can't strike the ball. Hantuchova is one of the cleanest strikers of the ball and she routinely makes over 50 UEs.

Berdych for example is also a better striker of the ball than Federer. He also makes lots of errors. Agassi. Safin. Baghdatis. Davydenko. THOSE guy strike the ball cleanly. Not Federer. Him and Nadal don't hit the ball that cleanly at all.

Federer. Absolutely ridiculous question. Talent does not exist in a vacuum. So because Nalbandian never fulfilled his potential he has infinity talent does he? Talent is not only impossible to define separate from dedication and hard work, but overrated on these boards, and achievement is underrated.

Those suggesting Nadal and Federer do not strike the ball cleanly know nothing about tennis. Literally nothing. Your opinions are discounted.

Federer. Absolutely ridiculous question. Talent does not exist in a vacuum. So because Nalbandian never fulfilled his potential he has infinity talent does he? Talent is not only impossible to define separate from dedication and hard work, but overrated on these boards, and achievement is underrated.
Those suggesting Nadal and Federer do not strike the ball cleanly know nothing about tennis. Literally nothing. Your opinions are discounted.

Click to expand...

:lol:

If you do not think talent is important, why did you pollute this thread with your presence?

Nalbandian is by far one of the biggest talents in this sport. Cry about it.

Federer at every age was more talented than Nalbandian. When they were younger they split their two most important matches, but Federer won 2 big tourmanents, but Bandy just 1. As they got older Federer continued to be the bigger talent. He could beat better players than Nalbandian.

Nalbandian whilst being a fantastic ball striker is vastly overrated as a player. He was never as good as Roddick, Hewitt or Safin. Coria was better on clay and Davydenko was his equal.

Federer, Safin and Agassi are the three most talented players for me. Stich and Sampras make up the top 5. In my time the last 22 years.

Federer at every age was more talented than Nalbandian. When they were younger they split their two most important matches, but Federer won 2 big tourmanents, but Bandy just 1. As they got older Federer continued to be the bigger talent. He could beat better players than Nalbandian.

Nalbandian whilst being a fantastic ball striker is vastly overrated as a player. He was never as good as Roddick, Hewitt or Safin. Coria was better on clay and Davydenko was his equal.

Federer, Safin and Agassi are the three most talented players for me. Stich and Sampras make up the top 5. In my time the last 22 years.

Click to expand...

Nalbandian is definitely overrated on this board. You are right he is not as good a player as Roddick, Hewitt, or Safin. Even Coria owned him when they played, and not just on clay.

In terms of natural talent, which he didnt fulfill, he might be more talented than Roddick and Hewitt, but by nowhere near as much as some people seem to think, and up with Federer or Safin in overall talent, not even close.

Federer at every age was more talented than Nalbandian. When they were younger they split their two most important matches, but Federer won 2 big tourmanents, but Bandy just 1. As they got older Federer continued to be the bigger talent. He could beat better players than Nalbandian.

Nalbandian whilst being a fantastic ball striker is vastly overrated as a player. He was never as good as Roddick, Hewitt or Safin. Coria was better on clay and Davydenko was his equal.

Federer, Safin and Agassi are the three most talented players for me. Stich and Sampras make up the top 5. In my time the last 22 years.